Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T05:50:24.008Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Oh, the number of things you will process (in parallel)!

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 May 2017

Alejandro Lleras
Affiliation:
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820. [email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]://www.psychology.illinois.edu/people/alleras
Deborah A. Cronin
Affiliation:
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820. [email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]://www.psychology.illinois.edu/people/alleras
Anna M. Madison
Affiliation:
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820. [email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]://www.psychology.illinois.edu/people/alleras
Marshall Wang
Affiliation:
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820. [email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]://www.psychology.illinois.edu/people/alleras
Simona Buetti
Affiliation:
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820. [email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]://www.psychology.illinois.edu/people/alleras

Abstract

We highlight the importance of considering the variance produced during the parallel processing stage in vision and present a case for why it is useful to consider the “item” as a meaningful unit of study when investigating early visual processing in visual search tasks.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Balas, B., Nakano, L. & Rosenholtz, R. (2009) A summary-statistic representation in peripheral vision explains visual crowding. Journal of Vision 9(12):13, 118.Google Scholar
Bravo, M. J. & Nakayama, K. (1992) The role of attention in different visual-search tasks. Perception and Psychophysics 51:465–72. doi: 10.3758/BF03211642.Google Scholar
Buetti, S., Cronin, D. A., Madison, A. M., Wang, Z. & Lleras, A. (2016) Towards a better understanding of parallel visual processing in human vision: Evidence for exhaustive analysis of visual information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 145(6):672707.Google Scholar
Ester, E. F., Klee, D. & Awh, E. (2013) Visual crowding cannot be wholly explained by feature pooling. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 40(3):1022–33.Google ScholarPubMed
Ester, E. F., Zilber, E. & Serences, J. T. (2015) Substitution and pooling in visual crowding induced by similar and dissimilar distractors. Journal of Vision 15(1):4, 112.Google Scholar
Lamy, D. & Kristjánsson, A. (2013) Is goal-directed attentional guidance just intertrial priming? A Review. Journal of Vision 13(3):14, 119.Google Scholar
Li, W., Piëch, V. & Gilbert, C. D. (2004) Perceptual learning and top-down influences in primary visual cortex. Nature Neuroscience 7(6):651–57.Google Scholar
Li, W., Piëch, V. & Gilbert, C. D. (2006) Contour saliency in primary visual cortex. Neuron 50(6):951–62.Google Scholar
Neider, M. B. & Zelinsky, G. J. (2008) Exploring set size effects in scenes: Identifying the objects of search. Visual Cognition 16(1):110.Google Scholar
Rosenholtz, R., Huang, J., Raj, A., Balas, B. J. & Ilie, L. (2012b) A summary statistic representation in peripheral vision explains visual search. Journal of Vision 12(4):14, 117. doi: 10.1167/12.4.14.Google Scholar
Wolfe, J. M. (1994) Guided search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 1(2):202–38.Google Scholar
Wolfe, J. M., Alvarez, G. A., Rosenholtz, R. E., Kuzmova, Y. I. & Sherman, A. M. (2011a) Visual search for arbitrary objects in real scenes. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics 73:1650–71. doi: 10.3758/s13414-011-0153-3.Google Scholar
Zelinsky, G. J. (2008) A theory of eye movements during target acquisition. Psychological Review 115:787835. doi: 10.1037/a0013118.Google Scholar